CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 104Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMedical Practices and RehabilitationPregnancy-related medical research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

INTENSIVE GROUP TRAINING VERSUS COGNITIVE INTERVENTION IN SUB-ACUTE LOW BACK PAIN: SHORT-TERM RESULTS OF A SINGLE-BLIND RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

Open access
Storheim, Kjersti, Brox, Jens Ivar, Holm, Inger, Koller, Anne Kathrine, Bø, Kari·2003·Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine
DOI 10.1080/16501970310010484
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the short-term effect of physical exercise and a cognitive intervention in low back pain. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SUBJECTS: Ninety-three patients sick-listed for 8-12 weeks for sub-acute low back pain were randomized to an exercise regime (n = 30), a cognitive intervention (n = 34) or a control group (n = 29). METHODS: Primary outcome measures were pain, disability, sick-listing and satisfaction with care. Secondary outcome measures were self-efficacy for pain and for function, fear-avoidance beliefs, emotional distress, generic health status and life satisfaction. RESULTS: Eighteen percent of subjects dropped out. Drop-out was most frequent in the exercise group. At 18 weeks after inclusion fear-avoidance beliefs were reduced in both intervention groups. The cognitive group demonstrated significant improvement in disability, self-efficacy for pain, emotional distress, general health and life satisfaction. Patients in the exercise group were significantly more satisfied with the treatment, and patients following the exercise protocol reduced pain significantly. No effect on sick-listing was seen. CONCLUSION: Cognitive intervention improved disability and may be feasible for most patients sick-listed in the sub-acute phase. Physical exercise reduced patients' symptoms, but requires high motivation by patients. Despite positive effects in intervention groups on variables considered as negative prognostic factors for long-term disability and sickness absence, interventions had no effect on sick-listing.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/16501970310010484

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 104

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Storheim, K., Brox, J. I., Holm, I., Koller, A. K., & Bø, K.
Affiliations
Norwegian School of Sport Sciences (NO)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine
Publisher
Medical Journals Sweden AB
Published
2003-01-01
Volume
35
Issue
3
Pages
132-140
ISSN
1650-1977 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1080/16501970310010484
OpenAlex
W2116144078
Cited by
104
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 5
FWCI
5.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Pregnancy-related medical research
Keywords
subacute low back pain, physical activity, cognitive intervention, sick-listing, disability, fear-avoidance beliefs, self-efficacy, emotional distress, life satisfaction, treatment satisfaction, short-term outcomes
MeSH terms
Adult, Exercise Therapy, Female, Health Status, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Compliance, Patient Education as Topic, Quality of Life, Treatment Outcome, Low Back Pain

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review